₦airaland Forum

Happy week day

hello.........

hello.......

happy weekend

hello.......

still available for grab

happy weekend

Hello happy weekend...

Hello happy weekend

Hello happy weekend.....

Hello happy weekend..

Hello happy weekend..

Come and buy ya own now......

Hello.......

Hello.......

Hello..

Hello..

Grab your own today......

Good morning....

Get yours today..

Good morning

Good morning.

Good morning.

Uniform of religion
by Femi Macaulay,. in Femi Macaulay FacebookTwitterSMSWhatsApp
As could be expected, the June 3 ruling by a High Court in Osogbo, Osun State, in favour of religion-related veil-wearing by female Muslim students in public primary and secondary schools in the state, has resulted in absurdities.
A background report: “The court, presided by Justice Jide Falola, in a 51-page judgment…held that any act of molestation, harassment, torture and humiliation against female Muslim students using Hijab constitutes a clear infringement on their fundamental rights. Folala cited Section 38 of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended) to rest his ruling.” It continued: “Osun State Muslim Community on Feb. 14, 2013, dragged the State Government to the court. They sought an order of the court to allow female Muslim students to enjoy their fundamental rights by granting them order to use veil in public schools.”
Following Justice Falola’s decision, a secondary school in Iwo on June 14 became a theatre of comicalities. A report said: “Students of Baptist High School, Iwo, who wore vestments, caused a stir in the school as other students who were in uniform hailed them. Some female Muslim students who also appeared in hijab equally gained access to the school without restriction. Also, some male students donned white robes around 8:30am before other students joined in donning white and purple choir robes…Also, some students dressed in white Celestial Sutana were hailed by their classmates…”
Considering that things have reached this theatrical stage, it remains to be seen how far the comedy of errors and horrors can go. The errors are based on an erroneous understanding of secularity; the horrors are based on a horrifying picture of what is possible when the question of secularity is not definitively answered.
In the final analysis, the legal endorsement of hijab in public schools in Osun State further highlighted the reality of ambiguous secularity. In this case, it is unclear why the judge could not distinguish between the uniform of religion and the uniform of secular education, and why he could not appreciate the incongruity of a combination of the two in public schools.
The students who wore church garments to school in Iwo “were allegedly children of some Christian clerics… in line with the directive of the Osun State chapter of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN)”. The Christian body had protested, and had also called for a protest against the court judgement that endorsed hijab-wearing in public schools during school hours.
A report quoted the head of the Catholic bloc of CAN in Iwo, Cathechist Paul Olagoke, who said its members were in the school to ensure that no student was chased out. He reportedly said: “We are here to defend the rights of our children. Since female Muslim students are free to wear hijab, our children are also free to wear anything they want, too.”
The plot thickens. Secularity needs to be clarified, so that clarity can put an end to unclear ideas about the limits and limitations of religion in a secular society pursuing social progress.
It is clear that the dramatic news pictures of some students who attended school in church garments cannot change the existing court decision validating hijab in public schools in the state. Clearly, the authoritative intervention of the highest structures of justice would be necessary for the needed clarity.
Ultimately, the path to take is the straight and narrow pathway of the law, particularly because the issue has not been settled by the final court, and the current decision can be still be challenged at higher levels of the justice system. The Christians cannot expect to change the current court judgment by their forms of protest outside the courts, and they should understand that and be guided by that reality.
Interestingly, the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC) responded to the adoption of unhelpful self-help by the Christians. It observed that some Christian students of the Salvation Army Middle School, Iwo, also attended school in church garments, apart from those that did the same thing at Baptist High School. The group advised the protesters in a statement: “If CAN is genuinely interested in protecting Christian interest, they should go on appeal, otherwise no matter their current protest (which will fade away with time like every other protest but only make the current CAN leaders get TV and newspaper popularity), the current judgement will remain the valid law of the land…the law will stand if Osun CAN doesn’t immediately go on appeal.” This is a developing story and Osun CAN should help it to develop further towards a definitive clarification.
It is said that History repeats itself. It remains to be seen whether the Osun Islamic scarf controversy would follow the course of the Islamic scarf controversy that arose in France in 1989 concerning the wearing of hijab in French public schools. For over a decade, the French controversy cried for clarity until President Jaques Chirac in 2003 “decided that a law should explicitly forbid any visible sign of religious affiliation in public schools, in the spirit of secularism”. A report said: “The law, sometimes referred to as “the veil law” was voted in by the French parliament in March 2004. It forbids the wearing of any “ostentatious” religious articles, including the Islamic veil, the Jewish kippa, and large Christian crosses. The law permits discreet signs of faith, such as small crosses, Stars of David, and hands of Fatima.”
What followed this important clarification of secularity? The report said: “In 2004, a year after the law was voted in, one organisation opposed to it, called the “Committee of the 15th of March and Liberty,” published a report on the law’s effects. The report cites the files of 806 students affected by the law. Of the 806 students, 533 have accepted the law and no longer wear their veils in class. The report also gives an assessment of students who have left the French school system because of this issue. Among them, 67 have pursued their studies abroad. Another 73 of those 806 suspended or expelled from schools over the veil have chosen to take government-run CNED correspondence courses in order to finish their studies. The number of those who have chosen to study via other, non-government forms of correspondence schools is unknown.” It added: “The opening of the 2005 school year passed largely without incident, and opposition to the law seems to have given way to broader public opinion. However, the actual number of those who no longer attend French junior high and high schools over their veils is unknown.”
There is no doubt that the French example is clearly secularist, and leaves no grey area that could be manipulated by those without a conceptual understanding necessary for a correct interpretation of the idea of secularity.
The secularity test in Osun State is useful. Hopefully, it would eventually help to further clarify the concept and practice of secularity for the benefit of the other states of the federation, and for the benefit of the state of the federation.

Still available.....

Inspection available.

There is only one question and if the CAN can answer it successfully i shall print portals to support them. The question :HOW DOES WEARING OF HIJAB BY MUSLIM STUDENTS IN PUBLIC SCHOOL INFRINGE THEIR FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS INDIVIDUALLY OR COLLECTIVELY?

13th June, 2016,

PRESS RELEASE:

OSUN CHAPTER OF CAN BREEDING ANARCHY   



The Osun State chapter of the Christian Association of Nigeria has vowed to order Christian students in public schools to wear church garments to school if Governor Rauf Aregbesola goes ahead to implement the judgement of the state’s High Court giving legal backing to the wearing of hijab to school. Justice Oyedeji Falola of the Osun State High Court, Oshogbo, gave the ruling on 3rd June, 2016.



The Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC) is worried by this show of collective arrogance. Osun CAN’s threat is a manifestation of poverty of ideas. CAN is at the end of its tethers. The decision to go public with this kind of threat is short in logic, long in mediocrity.



MURIC is constrained to do a brief x-ray of the situation. It is high time Nigerians admitted that there are fanatics and extremists among both Christians and Muslims. It is sad to note that Nigeria is currently sandwiched between fanatical Christians and extremist Muslims. The provocative and neo-colonialist propensities of the fanatical Christians often goad extremist Muslims to violence.



In this particular scenario, Osun CAN has simply upgraded collective fanaticism to officialdom and demonstrated the fact that it has no respect for the rule of law. It should be noted that the threat coming from CAN is tantamount to contempt of court. A competent court of law gives judgement, then the executive body of a religious group which is supposed to know better, starts issuing threats.



Yet in its characteristic manner as an unrepentant anarchist, a confusionist and advocatus diaboli, Osun CAN has appealed against the judgement of the court. Is it therefore not highly hypocritical to still turn around issuing threats? If Osun CAN knew the civilized way to reject a court judgement, why has it also chosen to take the barbaric path parri passu? Why not wait for the outcome of its appeal?



For those who care to reason, we reiterate the rationale for the demand for the use of hijab by female Muslim students in all public schools. Firstly, hijab is divinely commanded in the Glorious Qur’an (24:30-31) and failure to abide attracts Allah’s wrath. Secondly, Freedom to practice and manifest one’s religion is enshrined in Section 38 (i) & (ii) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.



Thirdly, the conventional school uniform was designed by the British colonial masters who, essentially, were Christians. The present school uniform is therefore a Christian uniform and it is being imposed on Muslim students. This, to us, is unacceptable. It is oppressive and sectional. It assails all known principles of democratic practices. 



MURIC therefore hails the June 3, 2016 judgement of Justice Oyedeji Falola as fair, balanced and historic. A Daniel is come to judgement.



The threat by Osun CAN stands logic on its head. It is only Muslims who use hijab everywhere they go, whether they are going to the workplace, to attend an official function, to a party or for a friendly visit. They use it whenever they are outdoors. Christians have never been known to do this.



It therefore sounds ridiculous to hear CAN threatening to direct Christian students to use church garments to school. MURIC has two posers for Osun CAN:


1.  Since it is not only female Muslim students who will be using the hijab (all conscious female Muslims in the state use hijab whenever they step out of their houses), will Osun CAN equally order Christian civil servants, businessmen, farmers and artisans in the state to start wearing sultana and other church garments anywhere they go?

2.  If CAN gives such an order, what kind of church garment will be used by Christians who are neither members of the Celestial Church nor members of any of the white-garment churches?

3.  As female Muslims use their hijab even to social events, will Osun CAN also order all Christians in the state to wear their church garments to all social events including the ‘owambe’ and overnight parties?



The high level of deceit in Osun CAN will be exposed if it fails to issue the above orders to all Christians in the state. CAN is using a tactic known as ‘elimination by procrastination’. The whole idea is to exterminate Islamic landmarks by disallowing or delaying their practice among Muslim children until the latter become adults. It is assumed that it will be too late to start practicing such things at that time since they are not used to it. A sapling is easier to bend than a tree.  



We call on the government of the State of Osun to ignore the rantings of Osun CAN. Aregbesola’s regime should not succumb to intimidation after satisfying all righteousness. Let the law take its due course.



We urge the Ministry of Education to ensure immediate and prompt compliance with the court’s directive. Hijab samples should be sent to all schools. The ministry should show the political will for implementation. Undue delay and disobedience of clear directives by school heads should be treated as insubordination and met with stiff punishment as contained in civil service rules.



We charge the Osun Police Command to do the rightful. The police has a duty to execute orders once the judiciary has made pronouncements. Anyone who incites citizens in the state to behave in a manner capable of causing public disorder should be made to face the wrath of the law. The court has made the type of garment approved by it abundantly clear. Anyone who causes minors to use unapproved garments should be dealt with according to the law.



Meanwhile, we urge Muslim parents and Islamic organizations in the State of Osun to remain proactive, calm and law abiding. We appeal to them to cooperate with the state government and the schools in ensuring that female Muslim students start using hijab made in the colour and design of their schools’ uniforms. Muslims must eschew all forms of lawlessness or the temptation to react to provocation from Osun CAN.



Finally, we call on all well-meaning citizens within and outside the State of Osun to call the state’s chapter of CAN back to the path of reason. In particular we appeal to both Mr. Femi Falana and Professor Wole Soyinka to speak out on the court’s judgement on hijab and CAN’s reaction in the same way that they intervened recently in the case of Ese Oruru of Bayelsa State. We are interested in seeing how objective the two respected social critics can be.




Professor Ishaq Akintola,
Director, 
Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC)

Hello happy day........

Hello happy day

Happy day..

Happy day